Well put.
We still have our share of stupidity with regard to unimportant petty
issues, but i think there is enough space for everyone up here, no one feels
crowded, so therefore no one feels they need to enforce regulations and
rules just to keep their little bit of paradise intact.
That must be what drives these home owners associations to make up these
bogus policies in the states.  They are terrified that if they don't make
them, they will loose their little patch of self inflicted paradise to
someone else, or someone will put a blite on it, or near it.
People I think who live in these places have totally forgotten what it is
like to have to fight, or at least worry about food, shelter and clothing.
They are too wrapped up in their wants and desires instead of their needs.
73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Walt Smith" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:53 AM
Subject: Re: Alabama Man On Top of Tower


> What sanity! It's amazing, as somebody observed on some radio show or
other
> just yesterday, how relatively trivial issues seem to fade into the
woodwork
> where they belong the farther north you go. The point being elucidated was
> that in areas where simple survival, particularly in extreme weather
> conditions, is a primary concern, other crap just seems to assume its true
> proportions.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 9:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Alabama Man On Top of Tower
>
>
> Well, all ham operators should move to Canada where, fortunately, we are
all
> still relatively free and equal.
> As far as towers and antenna support structures for amateur use goes,
> industry Canada has full jurisdiction over them, and over rides any local,
> or regional bi-laws or legislation that has been passed.
> Even if you are a part of a home owners association that has restrictive
> rules against antennas, they cannot legally do anything if you choose to
put
> up a radio tower as long as that tower is in accordance with federal
> regulations and criteria.
> The city where i live has a bi-law that states a person must have a permit
> to put up a tower, and get approval from any neighbors, excetra...all of
> which are not legally required.  However, industry Canada does encourage
> hams to inform their neighbors and to obtain a city permit if it will keep
> things from getting out of hand.    Here in the city, a person who wishes
to
> file a complaint about a tower, must pay $80 to file the complaint with
the
> city, and then must attend a hearing, where they will be told in no
> uncertain terms that the ham is well within his or her rights to erect an
> antenna support structure.
> Now, as for height, I believe most hams stay within the set bi-laws, but
> even those are not binding.  We're allowed 68 feet under the bi-law, but
can
> put up a tower of any height as long as it is within the federal guide
lines
> for space around the bass and supporting ground work and or guy lines, and
> as long as it doesn't interphere with federally regulated air space.
>
> So mister Alabama should move up here where he can be free to practice his
> hobby without penalty to his status, lively hood, or standard of living.
> I find it quite ironic that a country who fights for so called freedom in
> the rest of the world, restricts it and penalizes its own citizens for
> practicing it at home.
> But i guess the right to possess and carry a fire arm is more important
then
> the right to indulge in harmless and potentially helpful recreational
> activities such as amateur radio.
>
> 73
> Colin, CF6BKX
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.8/621 - Release Date: 1/9/2007
1:37 PM
>
>